Refreshing rain for the grassroots
Over the last few weeks, the buzzword in politics has become "grassroots". Even with a Daily Times editorial Sunday which tries to pooh-pooh supporters of a recent referendum petition drive - sniveling in part that, "Referendums are a pathetic tool for ensuring good government" - the strength of the masses, both in exerting their say on the city's tax increase and in fighting the recent battle from outside the Beltway against the Bush/Kennedy/McCain immigation bill, has become too large to ignore. And I feel like a little part of it because of an article I ran across.
Writing in National Review Online (h/t to fellow MBA blog Going To The Mat), commentator Mark Krikorian notes that:
...every Senate office was inundated by phone calls and faxes — hundreds-to-one against the bill.
The role of blogs and columnists and think tanks in fueling and directing this outrage was essential (emphasis mine), with National Review Online and the Heritage Foundation deserving special honors. But senators can still write them off as part of the Washington game rather than real people and real voters. One of the key groups focusing actual grassroots outrage was Numbers USA, which soared past a third of a million members because of public anger over the bill — and these are real citizen activists busily phoning and faxing, not a tally of passive small donors.
It seems that the overreaching of amnesty advocates has politicized a lot of people, and not just conservatives, over the non-enforcement of the immigration law. And that’s a good thing too — if the White House concludes that amnesty is unattainable, there will be a strong temptation to end the enforcement show that’s been staged over the past six months or so, with workplace raids designed to bolster the administration’s credibility on the issue. A vigilant citizenry will be required to ensure that doesn’t happen — that enforcement is not only not discontinued, but that it’s expanded, so we can end the Bush administration’s “silent amnesty” and get to work implementing a real strategy of attrition through enforcement.
This is a case where the average folks got off their collective asses and made a difference. Guest-hosting on Rush Limbaugh's radio program Friday, Roger Hedgecock opined that he hoped it would be only the beginning of a process where the grassroots begins regularly taking a stand when poorly written legislation is proposed. And I couldn't agree more.
Further, the grassroots are voting with their pocketbook, snapping it shut when the national Republican Party comes calling. Actually, they are catching up to my philosophy on this because I've never donated to the national or state Republican party, only to candidates. (I will say though that so far Jim Pelura's leadership of the Maryland GOP and emphasis on listening to us at the local level has impressed me for the most part, so that streak may end.) For our part, the Maryland GOP and Pelura drafted a statement in opposition to the immigration bill. States with similar stances have seen their contributions increase, while GOP supporters of the bill like the aforementioned Senator McCain and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham have provoked outrage, particularly Graham.
And while the local Salisbury referendum effort did not succeed (dooming Salisbury city property owners to a likely 14% tax increase), the national effort achieved its short-term goal of thwarting this particular immigration bill. So where will the people who wanted to see this bill pass go from here? While this rendition of the immigration bill is out, there's no telling how it could be inserted into another more palatable bill or otherwise enacted in the proverbial dead of night. Among other things, this method is how we'll get a minimum-wage increase as it was added to the supplemental appropriations bill funding the Long War for the next several months. Don't be surprised if a amnesty-friendly Senator tries the same method to slide the immigration bill or certain parts of it through the Senate.
As for the immigration bill itself, I opposed it for two philosophical reasons. First of all, I don't believe in rewarding illegal behavior - in most instances, these illegal aliens are sneaking over the border solely for economic reasons. Most come simply to work but on some occasions such as an impending birth, they take advantage of our lax citizenship laws. I'm not going to argue that there's a lot of people in other parts of the world who wouldn't do the jobs that Americans supposedly won't do, but we have a method already in existence for these people to come into the country legally. Many seasonal workers at our local Ocean City resorts take advantage of these laws. Also, there's a share of people who would fall into the category of trying to sneak into the country because of an oppressive government in their homeland; Cuban "boat people" being one example. These people seek to escape political persecution rather than migrate here because of a lack of economic opportunity in their homeland. Many of these people come here and readily assimilate into our culture, like those Cuban emigres in Miami or the Hmong people who scattered throughout the country after they were persecuted by the Laotian government for supporting us during the Vietnam War.
The second part of my opposition lies in asking a very simple, common-sense question: if we're not enforcing the Simpson-Mazzoli laws (among other immigration stautes) already on the books, what makes anyone think that we won't be back at this problem trying to come up with a new "solution" in 10-20 years? To be quite blunt, I have a serious problem with the attitude those in our Maryland General Assembly or in Congress share that an issue is solved simply by enacting yet another law or regulation. Most of the time it just creates more of a hassle than the situation beforehand ever was. The only law that seems to work properly in these cases is the law of unintended consequences. In the case of Simpson-Mazzoli we granted an amnesty to 3 million or whatever number of illegals were in the country at the time, and instead of solving the problem it just encouraged more of the same as people banked on the government going by its precedent and giving the new generation of illegals a "get out of jail free" card. In essence, that's what the Bush/Kennedy/McCain bill is supposed to do. All of the fines, penalties, "touchback" provisions, etc. go into effect only if a) citizenship is sought, and b) the law is enforced. Just try to make an illegal immigrant (oh, sorry, "undocumented worker") go by these provisions in a "sanctuary city".
And it was the grassroots, aided by the internet and by talk radio, that came to understand these issues in a big hurry once the word got out. Obviously, the Senate seeking to ramrod this bill through practically in the dead of night was a clue to their intentions, but fortunately the lawmakers were called on it and the reaction started to pour in from concerned citizens. However, this backlash we had against the amnesty bill can and should be just a first step in holding the people we elect accountable.
If there's two things that I'd personally like our elected representatives to remember, it's these:
Number one, it is OUR money that you're playing with. Spend it wisely. And, given the way of the world right now, a border fence that can stop much of the illegal inflow is a good investment of our taxes.
Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution spells out your duties, and the Tenth Amendment therein tells you that the powers not explicitly granted to you at the federal level belong to the states and the people. Please bear this in mind the next time someone comes up to you looking for yet another entitlement or expansion of federal power.
It's a view I hold and I'm pretty certain that a lot of Americans share that view with me. Once people get away from an obsession with how Paris Hilton is holding up in jail or the latest date some musical diva had, they can manage to catch on pretty quickly when someone's trying to put one over on them. So I welcome all of you to the real world, where vigilance is the price of freedom.